Institute for Social Research

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Institute for Social Research
logo
legal form Foundation under civil law
founding 1923 / officially opened: June 22, 1924
founder Felix Weil
Seat Frankfurt am Main ( ⊙ coordinates: 50 ° 7 ′ 6.3 ″  N , 8 ° 39 ′ 13.9 ″  E )
people Ferdinand Sutterlüty (acting director) ,
Max Horkheimer , Carl Grünberg (founding director)
Website www.ifs.uni-frankfurt.de
Institute for Social Research (2007)

The Institute for Social Research (IfS) at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University in Frankfurt am Main was founded in 1923 by a foundation from the businessman and patron Hermann Weil and his son Felix Weil . After the beginnings with an academic Marxism in the first few years, the institute received its educational significance when Max Horkheimer took over the management in 1931, who made it the central research center for critical theory . After he was forced to emigrate to the USA by National Socialist rule , it was reopened in 1951 as a research and teaching facility in Frankfurt am Main under the direction of Max Horkheimer. After Horkheimer's retirement, Theodor W. Adorno first became managing directors , after his death Ludwig von Friedeburg , before Axel Honneth , a student of Jürgen Habermas , took over the management of the institute from 2001 to 2018 . Since then, the provisional management has been with the native Austrian Ferdinand Sutterlüty .

Historical-ideological context of the establishment of the institute

The institute was founded in a historical situation that was characterized by the crisis of the international socialist labor movement that had arisen at the beginning of the First World War : the Second International had split in 1914, the revolutions in Central and Southern Europe (1918-23) had failed, and in Italy fascism had seized power in 1922. According to Perry Anderson , this historical constellation in the West led to a structural separation of Marxism from political practice, to a “fundamental” shift in emphasis of Marxism “towards philosophy” and to a stronger anchoring “in the academic field”. The result was a movement in the West (primarily in Germany, France and Italy) later referred to by Maurice Merleau-Ponty as Western Marxism , distancing itself from Leninist politics and Soviet practice.

The founding motives of the Institute for Social Research and especially those in its early phase were shaped by this western shift in focus of Marxism to philosophy and its academization. The German November Revolution was seen as the defeat of the workers' movement, which obscured the future prospects of a socialist revolution. In his collection of aphorisms and essays, Twilight, from 1927, Horkheimer analyzed the “impotence of the German working class”, which made them out of the question as an actor in socialism. As Rolf Wiggershaus writes, no one from the Horkheimer group had “hopes for the working class”. In the early years the scientific character of Marxism was still adhered to, but without any practical reference to the existing workers' parties. After a few years later the management of the institute had passed to Max Horkheimers, a variant of the theory became dominant, which represented a "continuation of Marx's intentions under historically changed conditions" and which was initially with the term "materialism", then a little later with that of "critical theory" has been flagged out.

history

1920s / 1930s

Foundation and beginnings as a Marxist institute

Group photo of the participants in the Marxist Work Week with Felix Weil (standing, 2nd from right), Friedrich Pollock (standing, 2nd from left) and Karl Korsch (front row seated, 5th from left)

Kurt Albert Gerlach was originally supposed to be the first director of the institute , but he died in 1922. In May 1923 the Marxist Work Week took place, which - according to Felix Weil - was initiated by Karl Korsch and which is considered to be the institute's first theory seminar. Many later employees and companions of the institute took part in the working week, including Friedrich Pollock , Karl August Wittfogel , Julian Gumperz and Richard Sorge as well as two of the most important "Western" Marxists , Karl Korsch and Georg Lukács . The event was financed by Felix Weil.

The institute's sponsor was the Society for Social Research , which was set up specifically for this purpose, with Felix Weil as chairman of the foundation. Weil's maternal inheritance was sufficient to build the institute and equip the library; To finance the running of the institute, one remained dependent on the support of Felix Weil's father, the grain merchant and multimillionaire Hermann Weil. This gave the Society for Social Research 120,000 marks or 30,000 dollars annually.

The institute was inaugurated on June 22, 1924 in Viktoria-Allee (today Senckenberganlage ). With the associated chair, the institute was inaugurated as the first research facility for scientific Marxism ; its first director was the Austromarxist Carl Grünberg , until then he was professor of political science at the University of Vienna , and his students included Max Adler , Otto Bauer , Karl Renner and Rudolf Hilferding . In his programmatic inauguration speech, Grünberg confessed to the representatives of the university authorities about the Marxist character of the institute:

“I too belong to the opponents of the historically traditional economic, social and legal order and to the supporters of Marxism. […] It is therefore only natural that, as soon as I approach scientific tasks in my field, I do so, armed with the Marxist research method. It should also be used at the Institute for Social Research, insofar as its work is carried out directly by myself or under my direction. "

The memorandum preparing for the establishment of the institute spoke of political independence and balance, but not a word about the institute's Marxist orientation. Since many authorities (municipal magistrate, university board of trustees, rectorate, economic and social science faculty, Prussian Ministry of Science) had to be involved, each of which could have vetoed, Weil camouflaged the project with what he called an " Aesopian language". Grünberg's clear words surprised the dignitaries present at the inauguration all the more.

Together with Friedrich Pollock, a childhood friend of Max Horkheimer's, Grünberg developed the concept of the institute, which was intended to promote “knowledge and understanding of social life in its entirety”. Grünberg saw the institute primarily as a research facility. Working rooms, a reading room and an excellent scientific library with 42,000 volumes, 412 magazines and 40 newspapers were available for this purpose. With Grünberg, his archive for the history of socialism and the labor movement came to the Frankfurt Institute. In the following years the institute made a name for itself with research on the history of socialism and economic history. Henryk Grossmann's Das Akkumulations- und Collapse Law of the Capitalist System was published as the first volume of his series in 1929 . (At the same time a crisis theory) .

The permanent employees of the institute in the early phase were the two main assistants Friedrich Pollock and Henryk Grossmann (since 1925 for Richard Sorge , who had left in 1924 , a former assistant to Gerlach) and Karl August Wittfogel . The permanent group of employees also included the doctoral students Leo Löwenthal , Paul Massing , Kurt Mandelbaum and Julian Gumperz , some of whom were supported by grants from the institute. From the beginning, the institute was a male company. Only the library staff, apart from the library manager, were women. From this, the Pollock biographer, Philipp Lenhard, concludes that “patriarchal privileges were also used by radical social critics”.

An essential part of the institute's work was the collaboration with the Marx-Engels Institute in Moscow on the publication of the first Marx-Engels Complete Edition (MEGA). In the institute, six employees worked in two shifts to reproduce 150,000 pages of the estate of Marx and Engels, which were held by the SPD executive committee, and which were transported to the Soviet embassy and from there to Moscow by courier. In the 1920s, the institute found an ideal environment in the left-liberal republican city and university of Frankfurt.

Max Horkheimer as head of the institute

The director ( Max Horkheimer , front left), with the most famous theoretician ( Theodor W. Adorno , front right) of the institute in 1964 in Heidelberg

After Grünberg's stroke in 1928, his first assistant, Friedrich Pollock, took over the management of the institute. In 1931, at the suggestion of Felix Weil, Max Horkheimer was appointed head of the institute and at the same time appointed full professor of social philosophy at the university. Felix Weil had also donated this chair in order to enforce his candidate. Horkheimer set different accents than Grünberg. In his public speech on January 24, 1931 when he took over the management of the institute, he emphasized that the current state of knowledge requires a continuous penetration of philosophy and individual sciences in order to establish the connection between the economic life of society, the psychological development of individuals and the changes in the cultural field. Programmatically, he called for the interdisciplinary cooperation of the specialist sciences from sociology , economics , history and psychology , which should be oriented in philosophical reflection on the issues of a social philosophy as a social theory .

Under his leadership, the Institute for Social Research published the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung from 1932 onwards , which appeared in the emigration from 1939 to 1941 as Studies in Philosophy and Social Science . The authors of the first years included Max Horkheimer, Leo Löwenthal , Friedrich Pollock, Erich Fromm , Theodor W. Adorno , Walter Benjamin and Herbert Marcuse .

One of the early surveys of the institute was the " workers and salaried employees survey" carried out in 1930/31 under the direction of Erich Fromm (a full institute member since 1930 and responsible for social psychological research projects) on the mental health of qualified workers, employees and lower civil servants , the results of which were only published in the USA in 1980 under the title "German Workers 1929"; Fromm and his colleague Hilde Weiss had published partial results as early as 1936 in the anthology Studies on Authority and Family .

In the summer of 1932, the institute opened a branch at the International Labor Organization in Geneva, which allowed it to analyze its extensive statistical material on the economic and labor market situation in the major industrialized countries. With this step, it was Horkheimer's intention to create “a kind of emergency and alternative quarters in the legally regulated neighboring country” in view of the approaching Nazi dictatorship.

National Socialism and Exile

With the takeover of the Nazis , the cultural climate changed. A third of the university's teaching staff has been excluded on racial and political grounds, including leaders in their fields. City and university lost the bearers of their liberal-republican culture. On March 13, 1933 the institute was closed; In a letter dated July 13, 1933, signed by Heinrich Richter-Brohm , the Gestapo declared it to be confiscated, expropriated and dissolved on the basis of the law on the confiscation of communist property .

The institute in Geneva and New York

Horkheimer recognized the looming danger early on and had been preparing the institute's emigration since taking over the management. In February 1933, the "Society for Social Research" was replaced by the "Société Internationale de Recherches Sociales" with headquarters in Geneva . In Paris, too, a branch office was set up in the Center de Documentation at the Ecole Normale Supérieure , headed by Paul Honigsheim . The new publishing house, Félix Alcan, was also based in Paris; in it the magazine could continue to appear in German until the war. The seat in Geneva remained a temporary arrangement for scientific work. The authorities only issued Horkheimer a temporary residence permit, Pollock, Löwenthal and Marcuse only received tourist visas. Due to the restrictive foreigner legislation, Horkheimer decided to move the institute to New York . Through the mediation of Robert Lynd , a sociology professor at Columbia University , the President of Columbia University, Nicholas Murray Butler , generously gave the institute a conveniently located university house rent-free for several years. Columbia University became the institute's scientific center. In contrast to other American higher education or research institutions that offered emigrants from Germany and Europe a new place of work and had been strongly influenced by emigrants in their work - Roosevelt University , the University in Exile , the Black Mountain College , the Institute for Advanced Study - the institute, now operating as the Institute for Social Research (ISR), was the only research institution completely transplanted from Germany to the USA.

Most of the permanent employees of the institute (in addition to Horkheimer: Pollock, Fromm, Löwenthal, Marcuse, Grossmann, Neumann, Kirchheimer, Wittfogel, Gumperz) had moved to New York by the mid-1930s (Adorno only came from London as an official institute member in 1938) . Since the foundation's funds had been invested abroad at a Swiss bank in good time, the economic continued existence of the Institute for Social Research and the further publication of the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung , continued as Studies in Philosophy and Social Science (1939–1941), secured for the time being. The collaborative research project - authority and family - that began before exile was continued with surveys in France and Switzerland and was published by the Paris publishing house, the foreword by Max Horkheimer is dated “April 1935, New York”; the dedication is addressed to the founder: "Felix Weil, the loyal friend".

The working contacts with the emigrated institute members were initially maintained, even though they increasingly had to seek outside-financed research and teaching assignments. Adorno, for example, worked half a position in the multi-year Radio Research Project led by Paul Lazarsfeld . There were regular discussions among the members about the character of fascism . Pollock developed a theory of state capitalism , which was received controversially in the group of employees and which Franz L. Neumann in particular contradicted with an alternative proposal. If Pollock presented the National Socialist regime as an authoritarian variant of state capitalism, Neumann's detailed analyzes (carried out in his best-known book Behemoth ) condensed into the type of “totalitarian monopoly capitalism ”.

After an inheritance dispute among the descendants of Hermann Weil, the annual donations were replaced by a funded fund in the mid-1930s. On January 1, SIRES had a capital stock of 4,560,000 Swiss francs, a year later it was only 3,560,000 Swiss francs; the loss of one million was due to the stock market crash of 1937 and to bad speculation by Pollock. Before the foundation's capital shrank, the institute had $ 75,000 to $ 90,000 a year from interest income. From 1938 the institute's financing problems worsened. The more than two hundred scientists who had previously received salaries, fees, grants, ship tickets and unbureaucratic grants felt this through cuts.

Shift of focus to the west

Dialectic of the Enlightenment (1947)

In 1940/41 Horkheimer and Adorno moved to the west coast of Pacific Palisades , a district of Los Angeles , and used the last years of exile to develop their main work Dialectic of Enlightenment . Pollock remained in New York as governor of the institute, which had been reduced to Löwenthal and a few other employees. In the letterhead he was now listed as "Acting Director" (previously: "Assistant Director"). The rest of the institute's staff, who also stayed in New York, were only temporarily employed until they could finance their living through other projects. In 1942/43 Marcuse, Neumann, Kirchheimer and finally Löwenthal received positions in the Office of Strategic Services , where they entered the service of the American war effort as Germany experts, but maintained contact with Horkheimer and the Rumpf Institute in New York. Pollock was in California every few months. Fromm had already left the institute in 1939 in strife; since he was the only institute employee with a life contract, he had to be settled with $ 20,000. He was able to practice as a psychoanalyst in the USA.

The shrinking institute in New York financed its employees Paul Massing and Arkadij Gurland mainly from funds raised by Horkheimer from the American Jewish Committee (AJC) for an "anti-Semitism project". Horkheimer and Adorno devoted part of their work on the west coast to this project, in addition to their joint work on the Dialectic of Enlightenment . While Horkheimer primarily performed management and organizational tasks for the AJC-financed series of publications Studies in Prejudice , Adorno prepared content analyzes of public speeches by anti-democratic agitators . In the chapter “Elements of Anti-Semitism” of the Dialectic the interlinking of her work on both projects was reflected. They completed their joint project in the spring of 1944; With the title “Philosophical Fragments” and the dedication “Friedrich Pollock for his 50th birthday”, they presented it to the honoree as a typescript. After that, Adorno was able to devote himself fully to research on the anti-Semitism project. In cooperation with the Berkeley Public Opinion Study Group led by the social psychologist R. Nevitt Sanford, he developed the F-Scale (F stands for fascism) to measure the attitudes and characteristics of authoritarian personalities by means of projective questions. The cooperation with Sanford and his two employees, Else Frenkel-Brunswik (a emigrated from Austria psychoanalyst) and Daniel J. Levinson, the later publication was The Authoritarian Personality with a preface ( Preface ) by Max Horkheimer as the first of the five Studies in Prejudice . The focus of the study was the “ potentially fascist individual”, whose main characteristic was determined to be the ambivalence between submission to the authorities and destructive rebellion against them. Due to its subject matter and its innovative research approach with its combination of statistical and interpretive methods, the extensive study in the USA met with great response and recognition, while in Germany the almost thousand-page work has only been partially translated. In the 1970s, the institute published excerpts from translations, mainly of Adorno's contributions. Nonetheless, as a pioneering achievement in social research, the study was also received by German specialist science, albeit with some critical objections.

Post war history

Return and reopening

In October 1946, the Lord Mayor of Frankfurt and the Rector of Frankfurt University sent Felix Weil and Max Horkheimer their wish to rebuild the institute. This invitation triggered a lengthy decision-making process at Horkheimer and Pollock. In April 1948, Horkheimer traveled to Frankfurt to assert property rights of the institute and to re-establish the Society for Social Research. In the early 1950s the institute returned to Frankfurt and was run as a private foundation as an institute at the university. In 1951, a new institute building was built on the Senckenberganlage in exchange for the old institute property that the city of Frankfurt needed for the expansion of the university. The architects were Alois Giefer and Hermann Mäckler . The formal reopening took place on November 14, 1951. The head of the institute was still Max Horkheimer , who had received his full professorship in the philosophical faculty and was immediately elected dean and a little later rector. Besides Horkheimer, only Adorno and Pollock had returned; both received (initially unscheduled) professorships at Frankfurt University. As the returning exceptions "of the distinguished lecturers from the heyday of Frankfurt University in the last years of the Weimar Republic" they could count on "benevolent tolerance". In November 1951, the Institute for Social Research was approved as a foundation by the Hessian Minister of the Interior.

At the beginning of the 1950s, a lot was still unclear in and for the institute. The decision of Horkheimer, Adorno and Pollock to finally return to Germany remained pending until 1953. Adorno spent 1952/53 as research director of the Hacker Foundation in the USA, also in order not to lose his American citizenship, and he was also waiting for a scheduled professorship in Frankfurt. At the request of Horkheimer and Adorno, the Göttingen sociologist Helmuth Plessner was to relieve the head of the institute, who was also rector of the university from 1951 to 1952, two to three days a week, initially as a leading employee, later as deputy director (for Adorno) in 1952/53 Officiated in 1953. In Horkheimer's letter to Adorno, however, Plessner's planned discharge was rated very negatively. Ralf Dahrendorf joined the institute on July 1, 1954 as Horkheimer's research assistant, but left it only two months later - to Adorno's disappointment; According to Adorno, he had received a brilliant offer from the University of Saarbrücken and theoretically felt that he “did not belong to us”, as he wrote to Horkheimer.

Felix Weil, who played a role financially either administratively or in the reopened Institute, had some items in the early 1950s Evening Outlook released from Santa Monica about the Institute, its visibility through the current publications in Prejudice Studies had increased considerably. In a letter to Weil, Horkheimer responded violently to the articles sent to him in Frankfurt but not discussed with him: For him (Felix Weil) the title of member of the American institute, which he claimed to be in the articles, was a sign of the Recognition for his financial support and loyalty has been granted, which does not entitle him and his help in "relentless proofreading for the Authoritarian Personality" "to presume to be one of their speakers. He must let him know "that the spirit and language of these articles are far from what I consider the true history of scientific life and the practical organization of the institute for which I am responsible."

First research projects: "Group experiment" and "Mannesmann study"

The first major research project of the newly founded institute was the group experiment financed by the Allied High Commission to research the political opinions and attitudes of various population groups in West Germany. In group discussions , the participants should discuss sensitive topics (persecution of Jews, German guilt, occupying powers, democratic form of government) as frankly as possible. The results were depressing: by far the largest number came from those who denied complicity and were ambivalent about democracy. The discussions held by 1,635 people in 151 groups - on over 6,000 transcribed pages - found their summary and interpretation in a research report published by Friedrich Pollock, which raised many methodological questions. It was published in the 1955 newly founded book series Frankfurt Contributions to Sociology . Despite the methodological criticism of their individual approach, the Frankfurt social researchers turned out to be pioneers with the group discussion method used for the first time in Germany. The procedure on which the main processor of the empirical material, Werner Mangold , wrote his dissertation, was included in the canon of fundamental methods and techniques of empirical social research .

As head of the institute, Horkheimer made Ludwig von Friedeburg , who had returned after an early internship at the institute and after three years at the Institute for Demoscopy in Allensbach, head of the institute's empirical department. His first task was to “bring the so-called“ Mannesmann Study ”, an investigation into the working atmosphere in the Mannesmann plants, “ to a good end ”. The rough report of the controversial commissioned work became a concise presentation of the results, including a predominantly quantitative evaluation of interviews and group discussions ; It was also published in the book series Frankfurt Contributions to Sociology , under the title Work Climate . Only later did v. Friedeburg evaluated and interpreted the empirical results in his habilitation thesis on the sociology of the work climate with the background understanding of the objective conflict of interests between management and workers. Burkart Lutz and Gert Schmidt have the work climate study of the Institute together with the participation study by the Economic Research Institute of the German Trade Union Federation and the study of the Social Research Center Dortmund the company image of the worker classified not only as the beginning of Participation Studies in postwar Germany (West), but their research groups as "Crystallization core" of the emerging industrial sociology section in the German Society for Sociology identified.

Friedrich Pollock, who worked in the newly founded institute without taking on an administrative function again, was "very present" in the early years. The university had made him an extraordinary professor in 1952 and a regular professor of economics and sociology in 1959. In 1956 he published his main scientific work on automation in the institute's book series. The book became his greatest success; In 1964 and 1966 it appeared in two further, completely revised editions and was translated into six languages. At the time of publication, Pollock was the first German-speaking scientist who systematically dealt with automation.

However, Horkheimer objected to the publication of a 1957 survey conducted by institute staff Friedrich Weltz, Christoph Oehler and Jürgen Habermas on the political awareness of students in the new book series. It was not so much the sobering results of the 171 Frankfurt students questioned after a random sample that offered the occasion for this as Habermas' extensive introduction “On the Concept of Political Participation”; it appeared politically questionable to Horkheimer because of its radical democratic statements. Even Adorno's positive vote and assessment of Habermass's introduction as a “relative masterpiece” could not overturn Horkheimer's rejection. Habermas, who began to appropriate the Marxist legacy of critical theory, represented a “security risk” for the institute for Horkheimer. Without reference to the institute, the study then appeared in 1961 in the new book series Sociological Texts by Luchterhand Verlag.

Until his retirement in 1964, Horkheimer ran the institute together with Theodor W. Adorno. The only joint publication after the war was a collection of lectures and speeches under the title Sociologica II . Adorno withdrew more and more from empirical work and devoted himself to the elaboration of his theoretical works ( negative dialectics , aesthetic theory ).

New institute management after Horkheimer's retirement

In 1964 the promising social theorist Jürgen Habermas returned to Frankfurt and took over Horkheimer's chair for philosophy and sociology. Habermas turned down the offer to lead the Institute for Social Research. Instead, Habermas and Ludwig von Friedeburg, who meanwhile held a professorship at the FU in Berlin from 1962 to 1966 and followed a call to Frankfurt in 1966, took over the management of the "Seminar for Sociology", a branch of the institute limited to teaching.

Ludwig von Friedeburg took over at the same time - alongside Theodor W. Adorno (managing director until his death in 1969) and the statistician Rudolf Gunzert - one of the three director positions of the institute. There he established a focus of empirical social research with studies of trade unions and industrial sociology , which to a certain extent followed on from his earlier work in the 1950s. Research in this area has been carried out by almost completely changed staff since around 1968. Its results have been published since 1974 with the first "trade union study", together with studies on performance remuneration and working time policy, with work-sociological research on the effects of computer use in production and with studies on industrial rationalization in the Weimar Republic, under National Socialism and under State Socialism GDR and Hungary. Women's research also emerged as a separate focus. With the sociologist Gerhard Brandt , a new director joined the institute in 1972; Until his retirement in 1984 he was mainly responsible for this new research focus. His successor was Professor Wilhelm Schumm, a former assistant to von Friedeburg, who from 1984 to 1997 headed the industrial sociology focus as research director, which was gradually shut down and could only be maintained through third-party funded projects. The third director was Helmut Dubiel from 1989 to 1997, who had previously identified himself as an employee of the institute (1983–1989) with publications about the former employees Leo Löwenthal and Friederich Pollock. During his directorate he also taught as a professor of sociology in Giessen. While doing research at the institute, he took part in the research focus of political sociology, which was established in the 1980s under the heading of “democratic culture”.

Commissioned work, as in the early post-war years, has not taken place since the 1960s. While the institute finances its basic budget through grants from the city and the state, its research activities depend on project-related funds from the German Research Foundation and other non-commercial sources (non-profit foundations, ministries, etc.).

Axel Honneth (2016)

Ludwig von Friedeburg, who had formally remained the institute director during his time as Hessian minister of education (1969–1975), became managing director on his return. In 2001, Axel Honneth replaced him in this position. Under Honneth, the work of the institute was again geared more strongly to questions of social philosophy. The WestEnd magazine, published since 2004, offers a forum for this . New journal for social research . Following on from the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung , published between 1932 and 1941, it stands for interdisciplinarity with the claim of a critical social theory. Since 2002, the Frankfurt institute has been organizing annual Adorno lectures with the Suhrkamp Verlag at Frankfurt University. The previous winners include philosophers, sociologists, historians, art historians, political scientists and literary scholars of international standing. Her topics are not devoted to Adorno hereditary exegesis, but rather the exploration of today's possibilities of critical social theory. The Theodor W. Adorno Archive was set up at the institute in 2005 and administers Adorno's entire estate. Ferdinand Sutterlüty has been provisional head of the institute since 2019 until the successor to Honneth has been settled .

theory

The IfS is closely related to the critical theory of the Frankfurt School founded by Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno and Herbert Marcuse . In addition to Adorno and Horkheimer, the IfS scientists also included Erich Fromm, Friedrich Pollock, Herbert Marcuse, Leo Löwenthal , Henryk Grossmann , Franz Neumann , Otto Kirchheimer and later Jürgen Habermas (1956–1959 as research assistant; 1964–1971 as successor to the chair von Horkheimer without a function in the research institute).

The institute's two economists, Henryk Grossmann and Friedrich Pollock, presented well-founded analyzes for the political-economic foundation of the critical theory. In his work The Accumulation and Collapse Law of the Capitalist System from 1929, Grossmann adhered to the fundamental susceptibility to crises up to a tendency to collapse inherent in capitalism, with the conclusion that the transition to socialism was laid out in capitalism. Pollock contradicted this; With his essays on the Great Depression, written in the early 1930s, he came to the opposite conclusion. Expanding state intervention would put the market, competition and private property inoperative; not capitalism would end, but its liberal phase. Pollock continued these considerations later in his emigration with his theory of state capitalism , which he identified as a “new order” that emerged from the global economic crisis. According to Helmut Dubiel , Horkheimer adopted the state capitalism theory in his 1942 essay Authoritarian State . Joachim Hirsch assesses Pollock's analysis as responsible for the theoretical transition of the later critical theory from the critique of political economy to the critique of technology, which then became the basis of its negative philosophy of history.

Since Axel Honneth took over the management, the focus of the projects has been on the analysis of “paradoxes of capitalist modernization” . Today the institute works in various working groups on current issues in capitalist society. The research program should be in the areas

  • Structural change of normative integration in capitalist societies,
  • Capitalist rationalization and labor,
  • Family change and changed socialization conditions,
  • Debureaucratisation of the welfare state and political democracy and
  • Cultural industry and electronic media

divided, interdisciplinary analyzing the various aspects of capitalist modernization and its contradictions. The work also includes the further development of critical social theory on a methodological and philosophical level. In their self-portrayal, Honneth and Sutterlüty emphasize : “From this [Horkheimers and Adornos] historical-philosophical analysis, which is known to be a far-reaching narrative of the self-destruction of the Enlightenment, today's research program of the Institute for Social Research is, however, both methodical and substantive Regards more than that it ties directly to them. "

reception

In the almost one hundred year history of the Institute for Social Research, it has had an ideal and institutional charisma in a variety of ways. In the scientific community it is perceived as closely linked, if not identical, to Critical Theory and the Frankfurt School . Its early members in particular - Horkheimer, Adorno and Marcuse - had the strongest ideological influences. With the critical theory they advocated , the British historian Perry Anderson assigned them to the political-philosophical current of heterodox Western Marxism . In his three-volume work The Main Streams of Marxism , the Polish philosopher Leszek Kołakowski classified it in the chapter The Frankfurt School and Critical Theory as a "paramarxist movement in Germany [...] that is institutionally linked to the history of the Institute for Social Research". In a more precise sense than with other Marxist tendencies one could speak of a "school". In his attempt historicism of Marxism interpreted Wolfgang Fritz Haug , the critical theory as "one caused by the historical circumstances away from Marxism."

The long-time director of the institute, Axel Honneth, has developed a normatively substantive social theory of recognition with his theoretical writings, with reference to the early Jena writings of the young Hegel and the symbolic interactionism of George Herbert Mead . His best-known book, The Battle for Recognition, found worldwide reception with its translation into fifteen languages. More closely linked to the institute's more recent research program is the visualization and further development of a critical social theory in the sense of the Frankfurt School, conceived under the heading “Pathologies of Reason”. Numerous studies on this topic have appeared in the series of books published by Honneth on behalf of the Institute for Social Research, Frankfurt Contributions to Sociology and Social Philosophy .

The founding of the Hamburg Institute for Social Research by Jan Philipp Reemtsma in 1984 can be seen as an institutional suggestion of the institute . On the occasion of Jan Philipp Reemtsma's 60th birthday, the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung called it the “only institute for social research in Germany that successfully follows on from the tradition of critical theory ”.

The building

The institute's first building was built in 1924 by the architect Franz Roeckle , an early NSDAP patron who he joined in 1932. The monumental structure was faced with embossed natural stone blocks. The location was Viktoria-Allee (today Senckenberganlage) diagonally across from today's location. The institute's building was finally destroyed during the air raids on Frankfurt am Main in World War II and finally demolished in 1950.

In 1951 the current building was built by the architects Hermann Mäckler and Alois Giefer . As a cultural monument, it is under monument protection . The previous building at the new location was the villa of the Kotzenberg family. The merchant and patron Karl Kotzenberg , a passionate Wagnerian, commissioned the architect Ludwig Neher to build a villa in Viktoria-Allee (today Senckenberganlage). The house was built from 1902 to 1905 according to Kotzenberg's ideas as a Wagnerian total work of art . The interior was created by numerous artists and artisans. The villa was designed as a replica of the Wartburg and was popularly nicknamed "Kotzenburg". The building was destroyed in the Second World War.

literature

Publications of the institute

  • Writings of the Institute for Social Research , Vol. 1–5. Leipzig 1828–1931; Paris 1934-1936
    • Volume 1: Henryk Grossmann: The law of accumulation and collapse of the capitalist system. (At the same time a crisis theory) , Leipzig 1929
    • Volume 2: Friedrich Pollock: The planned economy attempts in the Soviet Union 1917–1927 , Leipzig 1929
    • Volume 3: Karl August Wittfogel: Economy and Society of China. An attempt at the scientific analysis of a large Asian agricultural society. Volume 1: Productive Forces, Production and Circulation Process , Leipzig 1931
    • Volume 4: Franz Borkenau: The transition from the feudal to the bourgeois worldview. Studies on the history of the manufacturing period , philosophy, Librairie Félix Alcan, Paris 1934
    • Volume 5: Studies on Authority and Family. Research reports from the Institute for Social Research . Librairie Félix Alcan, Paris 1936.
  • Erich Fromm: Workers and employees on the eve of the Third Reich. A social psychological investigation . dtv, Munich 1983, ISBN 3-423-04409-8 .
  • Max Horkheimer, Friedrich Pollock, Franz L. Neumann, ARL Gurland, Otto Kirchheim, Herbert Marcuse: Economy, law and the state under National Socialism. Analyzes by the Institute for Social Research 1939–1942. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1984, ISBN 3-518-28071-6 .
  • Theodor W. Adorno: Studies on the authoritarian character . With a preface by Ludwig von Friedeburg. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1973
  • Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung , volumes 1–9, 1932–1941 (reprint), dtv, Munich 1980, ISBN 3-423-05975-3 .
  • Institute for Social Research at the Johann Wolfgang Goethe University Frankfurt am Main: A report on the celebration of its reopening, its history and its work. Frankfurt am Main 1952.
Sociologica (1955)
  • Frankfurt contributions to sociology . Vol. 1–22. European Publishing House, Frankfurt am Main 1955–1971
    • Volume 1: Sociologica [I]. Essays, dedicated to Max Horkheimer on the occasion of his sixtieth birthday, 1955, 2nd edition 1974, basic study edition, ISBN 3-434-45040-8 .
    • Volume 2: Group experiment. A study report, edited by Friedrich Pollock, with a foreword by Franz Böhm, 1955, 2nd edition 1963, ISBN 3-434-20003-7 .
    • Volume 3: Working atmosphere. An industrial sociological study from the Ruhr area, 1955
    • Volume 4: Institute for Social Research: Sociological digressions. After lectures and discussions, 1956, 3rd edition 1974, based on study edition, ISBN 3-434-46014-4 .
    • Volume 5: Friedrich Pollock: Automation. Materials to assess the economic and social consequences, 1956, 7th edition 1966
    • Volume 6: Freud in the Present. A cycle of lectures from the Universities of Frankfurt and Heidelberg on the 100th birthday, 1957
    • Volume 7: Georges Friedmann: Limits to the Division of Labor, 1959
    • Volume 8: Paul W. Massing: Prehistory of political anti-Semitism, translated from the American and edited for the German edition by Felix J. Weil, 1959, 2nd edition 1961
    • Volume 9: Werner Mangold: Subject and method of the group discussion process, 1960
    • Volume 10: Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno: Sociologica II. Speeches and lectures, 1962, 3rd edition 1973, based on the study edition, ISBN 3-434-46041-1 .
    • Volume 11: Alfred Schmidt: The concept of nature in the teaching of Marx, 1962, 3rd edition 1978, basis study edition, ISBN 3-434-45011-4 .
    • Volume 12: Peter von Haselberg: Functionalism and Irrationality. Studies on Thorstein Veblen's “Theory of the Leisure Class”, 1962
    • Volume 13: Ludwig von Friedeburg: Sociology of the business climate. Studies on the interpretation of empirical investigations in large industrial companies, 1963, 2nd edition 1966, ISBN 3-434-20001-0 .
    • Volume 14: Oskar Negt: Structural relations between the social doctrines Comtes and Hegel, 1964, 2nd edition 1974 under the title: The Constitution of Sociology for Order Science , ISBN 3-434-20060-6 .
    • Volume 15: Helge Pross: Managers and shareholders in Germany. Studies on the relationship between property and control, 1965
    • Volume 16: Rolf Tiedemann: Studies on the Philosophy of Walter Benjamin, 1965
    • Volume 17: Heribert Adam: Student Union and University. Possibilities and limits of student politics, 1965
    • Volume 18: Adalbert Rang: The Political Pestalozzi, 1967
    • Volume 19: Regina Schmidt, Egon Becker: Reactions to political events. Three opinion studies from the Federal Republic, 1967, ISBN 3-434-20011-8 .
    • Volume 20: Joachim E. Bergmann: The theory of the social system by Talcott Parsons. A critical analysis, 1967
    • Volume 21: Manfred Teschner: Politics and society in class. A sociological analysis of political education at Hessian high schools, 1968, 2nd edition 1969, ISBN 3-434-20013-4 .
    • Volume 22: Michaela von Freyhold: Authoritarianism and political apathy. Analysis of a scale to determine behavior bound by authority, 1971, ISBN 3-434-20025-8 .
  • Study series of the Institute for Social Research . European Publishing House and Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, from 1974
    • (numerous volumes, without numbering)
  • Research reports from the Institute for Social Research . Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, from 1976
    • (numerous volumes, without numbering)
  • Frankfurt contributions to sociology and social philosophy . Published by Axel Honneth on behalf of the Institute for Social Research, Campus Verlag, Frankfurt am Main, from 2002.

Secondary literature

  • Lutz Eichler, Hermann Kocyba, Wolfgang Menz: Social theoretical claim and the persistence of the particular. Theory and empiricism in the industrial sociological work of the Institute for Social Research. In: Hans K. Pongratz, Rainer Trinczek (ed.): Industrial sociological case studies. Development potential of a research strategy . Sigma, Berlin 2010, ISBN 978-3-8360-3570-5 , pp. 163-201.
  • Carl-Erich Vollgraf, Richard Sperl, Rolf Hecker (eds.): Successful cooperation: The Frankfurt Institute for Social Research and the Moscow Marx-Engels Institute (1924–1928). Correspondence from Felix Weil, Carl Grünberg u. a. with David Borisovič Rjazanov, Ernst Czobel u. a. from the Russian State Archive for Social and Political History Moscow. (= Contributions to Marx-Engels research. New series. Special volume 2). Argument, Hamburg 2000, ISBN 3-88619-684-4 .
  • Felicia Herrschaft, Klaus Lichtblau (Ed.): Sociology in Frankfurt. An interim balance. VS-Verlag, Wiesbaden 2010, ISBN 978-3-531-16399-4 .
  • Thomas von Freyberg: Bulky goods. On the history of the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research between 1969 and 1999. Frankfurt am Main 2016, ISBN 978-3-95558-163-3 .
  • Ludwig von Friedeburg: History of the Institute for Social Research University Library, Frankfurt am Main 2002.
  • Jeanette Erazo Heufelder : The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berlin 2017, ISBN 978-3-946334-16-3 .
  • Max Horkheimer: The current situation of social philosophy and the tasks of an institute for social research. Frankfurt University Speeches. Frankfurt am Main 1931.
  • Paul Kluke: The Institute for Social Research. In: Wolf Lepenies (Ed.): History of Sociology. Volume 2, Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1981, ISBN 3-518-07967-0 , pp. 390-429.
  • Ulrike Migdal: The early history of the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research . Campus, Frankfurt am Main 1981, ISBN 3-593-32904-2 .
  • Gerhard Probst: Universities as places of activity for exiles. In: John M. Spalek (Ed.): Deutschsprachige Exilliteratur since 1933 , Volume 2, Part 1, de Gruyter / Saur, Berlin / New York, 1989, ISBN 978-3-317-01159-4 , pp. 1446–1469 .
  • Willem van Reijen , G. Schmid Noerr (ed.): Grand Hotel Abgrund. A photograph of the Frankfurt School . Junius, Hamburg 1989.
  • Alfred Schmidt: The 'Journal for Social Research'. History and Present Significance . Introduction to the reprint of the Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung , 9 volumes, Kösel-Verlag, Munich 1970. Reprint dtv, Munich 1980, ISBN 3-423-05975-3 .
  • Gregor-Sönke Schneider: No critical theory without Leo Löwenthal. The journal for social research (1932–1941 / 42). (= Philosophy in the past and present. Volume 5). Edited by Alfred Schmidt and Michael Jeske. With a foreword by Peter-Erwin Jansen. Peter Lang Verlag, 2014, ISBN 978-3-631-64177-4 .
  • Rolf Wiggershaus : The Frankfurt School. History, Theoretical Development, Political Significance. Deutscher Taschenbuch-Verlag, Munich 1997, 5th edition, ISBN 3-446-13132-9 (first 1986).

Web links

Commons : Institute for Social Research  - Collection of Images

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b Claus-Jürgen Göpfert: “We don't want to be a museum”. In: Frankfurter Rundschau. February 19, 2019, accessed February 19, 2019 .
  2. ↑ Perry Anderson: On Western Marxism . Syndikat, Frankfurt am Main 1978, pp. 29-43.
  3. ↑ Perry Anderson: On Western Marxism . Syndikat, Frankfurt am Main 1978, p. 77.
  4. ^ Maurice Merleau-Ponty: The adventures of the dialectic . Chapter II: Western Marxism , Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1968 (French first edition 1955)
  5. ↑ Stuart Jeffries: Grand Hotel Abyss. The Frankfurt School and its time . Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart 2019, p. 119.
  6. ^ Rolf Wiggershaus: The Frankfurt School. History, theoretical development, political significance : 2nd edition. Hanser, Munich 1987, p. 143.
  7. ↑ Axel Honneth : Critique of Power. Levels of reflection in a critical social theory , Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1985, p. 11.
  8. ^ Helmut Dubiel : Scientific organization and political experience. Studies on Early Critical Theory ''. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1978.
  9. ↑ Michael Buckmiller . The “Marxist Work Week” in 1923 and the establishment of the “Institute for Social Research”. In: Willem van Reijen , Gunzelin Schmid Noerr (Ed.): Grand Hotel Abgrund. A photograph of the Frankfurt School . Junius, Hamburg 1989, pp. 141ff.
  10. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder : The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 41 f., 51.
  11. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 50.
  12. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 54.
  13. ↑ Quoted from: Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: Der argentinische Krösus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 52.
  14. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, pp. 46, 52.
  15. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2019, p. 85.
  16. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2019, p. 87.
  17. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2019, p. 85.
  18. ↑ Rolf Hecker : It started with a theory seminar in Thuringia. In: trend.infopartisan.net , June 26, 1999.
  19. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2019, p. 94.
  20. ↑ Heufelder reports 15,000 original manuscripts and 175,000 photocopies. See Jeannetfe Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 57.
  21. ^ Emil Walter Busch: History of the Frankfurt School. Critical Theory and Politics . Wilhelm Fink, Munich 2010, p. 18f.
  22. ^ Rolf Wiggershaus: The Frankfurt School. History, Theoretical Development, Political Significance. 2nd Edition. Hanser, Munich 1987, p. 31f.
  23. ^ Erich Fromm: German Workers 1929. A Survey, its Methods and Results . German edition: Workers and employees on the eve of the Third Reich. A social psychological investigation . dtv, Munich 1983.
  24. ↑ Studies on Authority and Family. Research reports from the Institute for Social Research . Libraire Felix Alcan, Paris 1936, p. 231ff.
  25. ^ Paul Kluke: The Institute for Social Research. In: Wolf Lepenies (Ed.): History of Sociology. Volume 2, Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1981, pp. 422f.
  26. ^ Rolf Wiggershaus: The Frankfurt School. History, Theoretical Development, Political Significance. 2nd Edition. Hanser, Munich 1987, p. 152f.
  27. ^ Emil Walter Busch: History of the Frankfurt School. Critical Theory and Politics . Wilhelm Fink, Munich 2010, p. 24f.
  28. ^ Gerhard Probst: Universities as places of activity for exiles. P. 1464.
  29. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 148.
  30. ↑ Helmut Dubiel, Alfons Söllner (Ed.): Economy, Law and State in National Socialism. Analyzes by the Institute for Social Research 1939–1942 . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1981.
  31. ^ Franz L. Neumann: Behemoth. Structure and Practice of National Socialism 1933–1944 . American original edition 1942, expanded 1944. Ger. Edition: European Publishing House, Frankfurt am Main 1977.
  32. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, p. 143.
  33. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School. Jewish publishing house in Suhrkamp Verlag, Berlin 2019, p. 152.
  34. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School. Jewish publishing house in Suhrkamp Verlag, Berlin 2019, p. 153.
  35. ^ Emil Walter Busch: History of the Frankfurt School. Critical Theory and Politics . Wilhelm Fink, Munich 2010, p. 28f. and 117.
  36. ^ Theodor W. Adorno, Else Frenkel-Brunswik, Daniel J. Levinson, R. Nevitt Sanford: The Authoritarian Personality . Harper and Brothers, New York 1950. - The four other studies were:
    • Dynamics of Prejudice , Studies in Prejudice Series, Volume 2
    • Anti-Semitism and Emotional Disorder , Studies in Prejudice Series, Volume 3
    • Rehearsal For Destruction , Studies in Prejudice Series, Volume 4
    • Prophets of Deceit , Studies in Prejudice Series, Volume 5
  37. ^ Theodor W. Adorno: Studies on the authoritarian character . With a foreword by Ludwig von Friedeburg. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1973, p. 1.
  38. ↑ Eva-Maria Ziege : Introduction by the editor. In: Theodor W. Adorno: Comments on 'The Authoritarian Personality' and other texts . Published by Eva-Maria Ziege. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2019, pp. 7–20, here p. 15.
  39. ^ Theodor W. Adorno: Studies on the authoritarian character . With a foreword by Ludwig von Friedeburg. Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1973. See also: Theodor W. Adorno: Comments on 'The Authoritarian Personality' and other texts . Published by Eva-Maria Ziege. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin 2019.
  40. ↑ Jochen Fahrenberg, John M. Steiner: Adorno and the authoritarian personality. In: Cologne journal for sociology and social psychology. 2004, Volume 56, pp. 127-152.
  41. ^ Rolf Wiggershaus: The Frankfurt School. History, Theoretical Development, Political Significance. 2nd Edition. Hanser, Munich 1987, p. 479.
  42. ^ Approval of a foundation dated November 14, 1951 . In: The Hessian Minister of the Interior (ed.): State Gazette for the State of Hesse. 1951 no. 48 , p. 716 , item 1132 ( online at the information system of the Hessian state parliament [PDF; 3.8 MB ]).
  43. ↑ Adorno felled them in a letter to Horkheimer of March 12, 1953. See Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer: Correspondence : Volume IV; 1950-1969 . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2006, p. 150 ff.
  44. ↑ "Plessner does so little that it almost amounts to disregard," wrote Horkheimer in a letter dated May 23, 1953. See Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer: Briefwechsel . Volume IV: 1950-1969. P. 200.
  45. ^ Theodor W. Adorno, Max Horkheimer: Correspondence . Volume IV: 1950-1969 . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 2006, pp. 275 and 277.
  46. ^ Jeanette Erazo Heufelder: The Argentine Croesus. Brief economic history of the Frankfurt School . Berenberg, Berlin 2017, pp. 169, 193.
  47. ↑ group experiment. A study report , edited by Friedrich Pollock, with a foreword by Franz Böhm, Frankfurt am Main 1955.
  48. ↑ See the criticism by Peter R. Hofstätter and Adorno's reply in: Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie. 9th vol., 1957, pp. 97-117.
  49. ↑ Werner Mangold: Subject and method of the group discussion process . European Publishing House, Frankfurt am Main 1960.
  50. ↑ See René König (Hrsg.): Handbuch der empirischen Sozialforschung . Volume 2: Basic Methods and Techniques. First part. 3. Edition. dtv, Stuttgart 1973, pp. 228-259.
  51. ^ Rolf Wiggershaus: The Frankfurt School. History, Theoretical Development, Political Significance. 2nd Edition. Hanser, Munich 1987, p. 536.
  52. ^ Institute for Social Research: Working atmosphere . An industrial sociological study from the Ruhr area . European Publishing House, Frankfurt am Main 1955.
  53. ^ Ludwig von Friedeburg: Sociology of the business climate. Studies on the interpretation of empirical studies in industrial societies . European Publishing House, Frankfurt am Main 1963.
  54. ↑ On the early empirical research of the post-war years, cf. Johannes Platz: The Practice of Critical Theory. Applied social science and democracy in the early Federal Republic 1950–1960 . Diss. University of Trier. Trier 2012 online
  55. ↑ Theo Pirker , Siegfried Braun, Burkart Lutz, Fro Hammelrath: Arbeiter, Management, Mitbestbildung . Stuttgart u. Düsseldorf 1955.
  56. ^ Heinrich Popitz , Hans Paul Bahrdt , Ernst August Jueres, Hanno Kesting: Technology and industrial work. Sociological studies in the metallurgical industry . Mohr (Siebeck), Tübingen 1957.
  57. ↑ Burkart Lutz, Gert Schmidt: Industrial sociology . In: René König (Ed.): Handbook of empirical social research . Tape. 8: Profession, Industry, Social Change. 2nd Edition. Enke, Stuttgart 1977, pp. 101-262, here p. 156 ff.
  58. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School . Jüdischer Verlag im Suhrkamp Verlag, Berlin 2019, pp. 275 f., 295.
  59. ^ Friedrich Pollock: Automation. Materials for assessing the economic and social consequences . Series: Frankfurt Contributions to Sociology , Volume 4. Europäische Verlagsanstalt, Frankfurt am Main 1956.
  60. ^ Philipp Lenhard: Friedrich Pollock. The gray eminence of the Frankfurt School . Jewish publishing house in Suhrkamp Verlag, Berlin 2019, p. 287 f.
  61. ^ Rolf Wiggershaus: The Frankfurt School. History, Theoretical Development, Political Significance. 2nd Edition. Hanser, Munich 1987, pp. 608ff.
  62. ^ Emil Walter Busch: History of the Frankfurt School. Critical Theory and Politics . Wilhelm Fink, Munich 2010, p. 35.
  63. ^ Jürgen Habermas, Ludwig von Friedeburg, Christoph Oehler, Friedrich Weltz: Student and Politics. A sociological investigation into the political consciousness of Frankfurt students . Luchterhand, Neuwied 1961.
  64. ^ Max Horkheimer, Theodor W. Adorno: Sociologica II. Speeches and lectures . Europäische Verlagsanstalt, Frankfurt am Main 1962. ( Sociologica I was a commemorative publication for Max Horkheimer's 60th birthday, which was also published in 1955 by the Europäische Verlagsanstalt as Volume 1 of the series Frankfurt Contributions to Sociology .)
  65. ^ Joachim Bergmann, Otto Jacobi, Walther Müller-Jentsch : Unions in the Federal Republic. Frankfurt am Main 1974.
  66. ^ Friedrich Pollock: stages of capitalism. Ed. U. introduced by Helmut Dubiel. Beck, Munich 1975, Leo Löwenthal: I never wanted to take part. An autobiographical conversation with Helmut Dubiel . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1980. - Helmut Dubiel, Alfons Söllner (eds.): Economy, Law and State in National Socialism. Analyzes by the Institute for Social Research 1939–1942. Beck, Munich 1981.
  67. ↑ Cf. The Democratic Question (together with Ulrich Rödel and Günther Frankenberg). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1989. - Democratic upheaval in Eastern Europe (together with Rainer Deppe and Ulrich Rödel). Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1990.
  68. ↑ See Adorno lectures since 2002
  69. ^ Adorno Archive
  70. ↑ The current situation of capitalism and the prospects of a reorganization of the planned economy. In: Journal for Social Research. Volume 1 (1932), No. 1, pp. 8-28 and comments on the economic crisis. In: Journal for Social Research. Volume 2 (1933), Volume 3, pp. 321-354.
  71. ↑ Ulrich Ruschig: Further thinking in the Marxist tradition: The doctrine of the authoritarian state. In: Ulrich Ruschig , Hans Ernst Schiller (ed.): State and politics with Horkheimer and Adorno . Nomos, Baden-Baden 2014, pp. 73-103, here pp. 77 ff.
  72. ^ State Capitalism. Its Possibilities and Limitations. In: Studies in Philosophy and Social Science. Vol IX (1941), pp. 200–225 and Is National Socialism a New Order? In: Studies in Philosophy and Social Science. Vol IX (1941), pp. 440-455. Both in German translation in: Helmut Dubiel / Alfons Söller (Ed.): Economy, Law and State in National Socialism. Analyzes by the Institute for Social Research 1939–1942. Beck, Munich 1981.
  73. ↑ Helmut Dubiel: Introduction by the editor: Critical theory and political economy. In: Friedrich Pollock: Stages of Capitalism . Edited and introduced by Helmut Dubiel. CH Beck, Munich 1975, pp. 7-19. here p. 17.
  74. ↑ Joachim Hirsch: Capitalism? On the controversy between Friedrich Pollock, Max Horkheimer and Franz Neumann regarding the character of the National Socialist system. In: Ulrich Ruschig, Hans-Ernst Schiller (ed.): State and politics with Horkheimer and Adorno . Nomos, Baden-Baden 2014, pp. 60–72, here p. 62.
  75. ↑ Axel Honneth and Ferdinand Sutterlüty: Normative Paradoxien der Gegenwart - a research perspective. In: WestEnd. New journal for social research. 8th year 2011, issue 1, pp. 67-85.
  76. ^ Ludwig von Friedeburg: History of the Institute for Social Research University Library, Frankfurt am Main 2002, p. 15.
  77. ↑ Axel Honneth and Ferdinand Sutterlüty: Normative Paradoxien der Gegenwart - a research perspective. In: WestEnd. New journal for social research. 8th year 2011, issue 1, pp. 67–85, here p. 71.
  78. ↑ Perry Anderson: On Western Marxism . Syndikat, Frankfurt am Main 1978, p. 46. See also: Diethard Behrens, Kornelia Hafner: Westlicher Marxismus . Butterfly, Stuttgart 2017.
  79. ^ Leszek Kołakowski: The main currents of Marxism. Origin, development, decay . 3 volumes. Piper. Munich / Zurich 1978, Volume 3, Chapter 10, pp. 373-430, here p. 373.
  80. ^ Wolfgang Fritz Haug: Western Marxism? Critique of a necessary attempt to historicize Marxist theory. In: The argument. No. 110, 20th vol., 1978, pp. 484-502.
  81. ↑ Struggle for recognition. On the moral grammar of social conflicts . Suhrkamp, ​​Frankfurt am Main 1994.
  82. ↑ Jürgen Kaube : Of wolves and civilized people. In: Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. November 26, 2012, p. 34.
  83. ↑ Heike Risse: Early Modernism in Frankfurt am Main 1920–1933. Frankfurt 1984, p. 54.
  84. ↑ Sacha Roesler: Fortress of Science. The first building of the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research and its ambiguous character. In: Neue Zürcher Zeitung . November 3, 2012, p. 65.
  85. ↑ Heinz Schomann, Volker Rödel, Heike Kaiser: Monument topography city of Frankfurt am Main. Revised 2nd edition, limited special edition on the occasion of the 1200th anniversary of the city of Frankfurt am Main. Societäts-Verlag, Frankfurt am Main 1994, ISBN 3-7973-0576-1 .
  86. ^ Anna Leiss: Karl Kotzenberg. In: Unireport. No. 3, May 19, 2010 uni-frankfurt.de
This version was added to the list of articles worth reading on April 4, 2020 .